[A-List] EU/US rivalry: Iran

["Michael Keaney" <michael.keaney@xxxxxx>]

EU and Iran talk trade, not war
By Hooman Peimani
Asia Times, June 7 2003

Iran and the European Union (EU) this week met for three days in Tehran to
conduct their fourth round of talks on a Trade and Cooperation Agreement
(TCA). The talks also included negotiations on political issues of interest
to both sides. As reflected in these talks, the EU's declared policy of
engagement towards Iran is in clear opposition to the American policy of
isolation and regime change. While reflecting its interest in Iran for its
own merits, such policy also demonstrates the EU's long-term plan to remodel
itself as a political, economic and military block to prevent the creation
of an American-led unipolar international system, despite all the recent
hand-shaking between European and American leaders.

The EU and Iran began their talks towards a TCA last December. As Iranian
Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hamid-Reza Asefi stated on Monday, "An initial
understanding has been reached between Iran and the European Union to come
up with a commercial agreement and the two sides believe the agreement would
meet their mutual interests."

Based on that understanding, they have conducted four rounds of negotiations
dealing with various aspects of the desired comprehensive agreement covering
a wide range of economic issues. Parallel to these, they have also conducted
political negotiations to find a common ground on a range of issues,
including terrorism and drug trafficking, weapons of mass destruction and
human rights. Last December they held a meeting on the latter, with the
participation of government officials and non-governmental organizations to
encourage a dialogue on the issue.

As provided by EU regulations, the European Commission, the EU's executive
organ, has conducted the TCA talks with Iran. They have been led by the EU
states holding the rotational EU presidency. Thus, Greece, the current
president, chaired the fourth round. Italy, the next president, will conduct
the fifth round scheduled for an unspecified time in the second half of
2003. As evident in the recent round, the continuation of negotiations
towards a TCA when the American government seeks to destabilize Iran
indicates the EU's disapproval of such policy. On the one hand, this EU
behavior reveals Iran's importance for the Europeans for political, economic
and security reasons. Being located in a strategically important region,
that country is a rich regional power with a growing undersatisfied market
and with a capability to resist the US's efforts to consolidate itself as
the leader of a unipolar international system. It therefore shares the
European objective of forming a multipolar system. Hence, quoting the EU
delegation, the Iranian news service IRNA reported the EU's characterization
of Iran as "a key player on the regional and international levels".

On the other, the EU's behavior also signifies a growing rift between it and
the US. In the post-Saddam Hussein era, the efforts on both sides to improve
their damaged relations have not eliminated the root causes of their
differences, although economic, political and security necessities have
forced them to tone things down. These differences manifested themselves in
their two different approaches to Iraq, although the roots can be traced to
the the 1960s.

The evident schism between the EU and the US is the natural outcome of the
"maturation" of the European economies after their destruction or severe
weakening during World War II. The growth and technological advancements of
those economies now give the EU the confidence to ask for a larger share of
international markets, as well as for commensurate international status.
Launched in the late 1990s, the EU's program for a common European military
force, though still in its infancy, has sought to create a military
capability separate from the American-dominated North Atlantic Treaty
Organization to back its political and economic demands. Briefly, these
developments have put the EU on a collision course with the US.

The fourth round of talks were meant to pave the way to a TCP whose actual
conclusion requires more negotiations to hammer out all differences,
including political ones. However, its concrete achievements are yet to be
released, even though they seemed to be positive, as evident in Asefi's
Monday statements. Accordingly, the two sides "agreed to institutionalize
their ties and [to] draw up a new framework for economic and political
relations touching all areas". Moreover, they decided to strengthen their
parliamentary ties due to the "very sensitive role" their parliaments could
"play in support of their [respective] governments and social institutions".
Asefi described the talks as "very constructive, transparent and positive",
while acknowledging the two sides' having "different views in some cases"
which he termed as "natural".

As Asefi stated, the fourth round of talks indicated that the two sides were
determined to establish "serious and long-term ties". Notwithstanding the
efforts to show unanimity between the Europeans and the Americans towards
Iran, such as the Group of Eight (G8) demand of Iran to comply fully with
International Atomic Energy Agency regulations in its non-military nuclear
program, the evidence suggests their continued differences.

One clear example was the distancing of French President Jacques Chirac and
German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder from suggestions of their support of any
American military action against Iran. To the dismay of the American
government, they rejected right after the mentioned show of solidarity an
interpretation that the G8 common demand and backing of nuclear
non-proliferation implied their approval of an American war against Iran.

Another was the holding of the fourth round of EU-Iran talks exactly
parallel to the G8 meeting (June 1-3). Thus, while the American government
was presumably trying to sell its plan of a regime change in Iran to the
European G8 members in Evian, the 20-person EU delegation in Tehran was
reiterating its respective membership's commitment to continue the process
of dialogue and engagement with the targeted regime.